Trump is shot!

[noharleyyet]

i mean, the bookmakers odds have certainly changed since saturday.

reagans failed assassination cemented him in the hearts of the american public unlike anything else. apples to oranges indeed (no pun intended), but, there are similarities in how the public views a triumphant bloodied rise from a failed assassination.

my personal opinion, i feel like this just sealed the re election

Donald Trump's chances of winning election soar after shooting

The former president's odds of winning the 2024 presidential election improved to 4/11 (73.3 percent) following Saturday's failed assassination.

www.newsweek.com

Is that modern math...coz I'm lost.

 

[TOGIE]

Is that modern math...coz I'm lost.

i think it's the book odds. as the percentage he wins goes up the payout goes down. but i'm still not sure they make sense to me

 

[Redmt]

That is a screenshot. Did you mean “photo op”?

Damn autocorrect

 

[SD_Prairie_Goat]

I'm real curious why it took so long for Judge Cannon to dismiss the case... the reason, "appointment of Special Council Jack Smith was unlawful".

I'm not very versed in the legal world, but seems odd to me that a judge would say something like that. Doesn't seem like it would be under her purview as the judge on this case to monitor and regulate the legislative branch appointment. But I don't have any case law to back my claim up, just a lot of judge Judy

 

[TOGIE]

i'm furiously trying to understand those "odds" in the article @noharleyyet

if anyone else knows i'd love to hear it.

 

[INMT]

As I said, who knows if it's legit.

Yet you repost it!?! Knowing it might not be true. This is a major part of what is wrong with how people receive their information these days!!!

 

[brymoore]

i'm furiously trying to understand those "odds" in the article @noharleyyet

if anyone else knows i'd love to hear it.

Similar to a boxing match or horse race. Money is coming in for T to win - meaning the gamblers think T will win. More money on T moves the payout down, adjusting the corresponding odds.

Or… no one is placing money on B to win unless the payout equals the lower chance B wins.

 

[SAJ-99]

i'm furiously trying to understand those "odds" in the article @noharleyyet

if anyone else knows i'd love to hear it.

UK bookie. That explains a lot. None of numbers will make sense.

 

[seeth07]

Combination of sources reporting the current betting odds for the US Pres election:

 

[Johnny Bravo]

Let’s face it….him getting shot at IMO does not fix the single issue voter issue we have in this country. Y’all can go back and forth all day long with speculation, I heard this, I saw this, it will affect this…blah blah blah….in the end him getting shot at won’t change peoples votes that vote R, D or I in the end that are single issue voters

 

[Dave N]

Let’s face it….him getting shot at IMO does not fix the single issue voter issue we have in this country. Y’all can go back and forth all day long with speculation, I heard this, I saw this, it will affect this…blah blah blah….in the end him getting shot at won’t change peoples votes that vote R, D or I in the end that are single issue voters

It may not change votes but I'm sure the campaign contributions will pick up, and money talks in elections.

 

[SAJ-99]

The vocals are most often the entrenched, IMO. We have many vocals here who are solid Red or Blue. What we see and hear/read are not the ones who sway. Those who are easily swayed, the sheep that follow and the religious sect that Trump panders - a higher % of those who sway and those who (in the past) have back burner intent to vote - I believe they will be more inclined to vote.

I am in the camp that it won't change anyones vote. There may be some validity to motivating people to show up at the polls, but the election is still 4 months away and Americans generally have the attention span of a puppy. If someone is on the fence about voting, there will be 1000 other things between now and then that sway them from not going. They are looking for an excuse not to go. If the polls favor Trump heavily, that itself is a reason to not show up.

I do think it increases the chance Biden drops out. He is being critiqued for a perceived difference in "strength". That photo of Trump helps him immensely. The problem Dems have is they need to find a candidate that is willing to entertain the possibility of tanking their future political career.

 

[Wildabeest]

It may not change votes but I'm sure the campaign contributions will pick up, and money talks in elections.

With Biden’s inflation and all, they HAVE to give more .

 

[crock239]

So it makes no sense to me: why wait to take a shot AFTER the gunman pulls the trigger several times... unless, of course you are wanting him to be successful before you take him out. That way it appears you did something to "protect" who you were there to protect.

Am I the only one that watches that video and thinks that particular sniper never fired a shot? Looks to me more like he's lifting his head and adjusting rifle positioning for target acquisition. If he fired "when the rifle jerked" or whatever the article says, he snapped off a round in a hurry. Audio would also support he didn't fire.

Kind of supports the other comments that this particular sniper teams line of sight was blocked or something and the other SS sniper team actually fired

I initially had the same thoughts as many others...how did the shooter ever got off a shot if he was on roof for multiple minutes?

But then, even if they know there's a threat out there via radio comms, they likely also knew local LEO were working on it...how do you know the guy you can partially see on a roof isn't local LEO? Clothing and description I guess?

Once he starts shooting at the rally you know for sure.

Either way, still shocked this guy was able to get access to that roof so close to the venue and get off rounds the way he did...I truly didn't think that'd be possible in today's day and age of security...apparently SS thought the same.

 

[BuzzH]

Here’s a hint for you.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1812712234948100140

We will see how much traction it gets.

Always need a scapegoat when there's a bad decision made.

 

[rjthehunter]

Conspiracy theories aside, that probably won Trump the election. For better or worse.

Mind-boggling that a shooter was allowed to get up on a roof within shooting distance of the stage. Like they didn't see the problem with that building before the rally? Crazy.

I think the debate performance from Biden sealed his fate more than an attempted assassination on the former president.

 

[JDH]

Am I the only one that watches that video and thinks that particular sniper never fired a shot? Looks to me more like he's lifting his head and adjusting rifle positioning for target acquisition. If he fired "when the rifle jerked" or whatever the article says, he snapped off a round in a hurry. Audio would also support he didn't fire.

Kind of supports the other comments that this particular sniper teams line of sight was blocked or something and the other SS sniper team actually fired

I initially had the same thoughts as many others...how did the shooter ever got off a shot if he was on roof for multiple minutes?

But then, even if they know there's a threat out there via radio comms, they likely also knew local LEO were working on it...how do you know the guy you can partially see on a roof isn't local LEO? Clothing and description I guess?

Once he starts shooting at the rally you know for sure.

Either way, still shocked this guy was able to get access to that roof so close to the venue and get off rounds the way he did...I truly didn't think that'd be possible in today's day and age of security...apparently SS thought the same.

Like so many things in life, it seems to have been a combination of little things that added up to a big f-up.

The SS leans heavily on preventing anyone from getting into this position to begin with so it was probably a bit of a surprise when he popped up. The SS was probably in disbelief that someone with a rifle could get that close themselves. I imagine the SS cleared that building the night before but given it was on a different property across a fence, it wasn't given as much thought the day of. Heck, the local PD may have been in charge of keeping people out of there, or they may have even allowed people who worked there access.

Two things I noticed about the sniper team in the background. The way he lifted his head, I don't think he had a clear line of sight to the guy. Given the way he lowered his rifle, it appears he was scanning way out beyond 147 yards. And the shots echoing off the metal buildings probably made it harder to find the source.

Given how Trump was supposed to be in Vegas that night, I'm sure some of his SS was already prepping so they were short handed.

I imagine after the local PD had a rifle shoved in his face he dropped back to take cover. Probably his department's policy to wait for back up.

I think it's possible the second SS sniper didn't have permission to shoot him yet either. He was farther away so maybe it took longer to get on him or maybe it wasn't even "his" sector to watch over. And I'm sure the shooter was hurrying since he had been caught. I get the whole FAFO/Darwinism concept, but imagine if it had been some kid with binos that wanted to get a better look. How bad would that have looked? I think the optics of that could have been bad enough to alter the election results.

 

[TwistedSage]

There's ROE and there's escalation of force EoF. Eof should correlate to the ROE and they should both be drilled to the point of one being able to go through the whole EOF due to what they see in front of them. The perceived threat can quickly become a confirmed threat and ROE/EOF can go from 0-10 in seconds. Even so there are escalations in place to check or stop perceives threats and keeping the whole situation from escalations out of control.

Complacency or communication failure who knows. But it was definitely a failure in operations.

 

[TwistedSage]

The sight of someone crawling around a rooftop with a gun would certainly call for an escalation of force even it it did no escalate to shots fired.

 

[Bonasababy]

i mean, the bookmakers odds have certainly changed since saturday.

reagans failed assassination cemented him in the hearts of the american public unlike anything else. apples to oranges indeed (no pun intended), but, there are similarities in how the public views a triumphant bloodied rise from a failed assassination.

my personal opinion, i feel like this just sealed the re election

Donald Trump's chances of winning election soar after shooting

The former president's odds of winning the 2024 presidential election improved to 4/11 (73.3 percent) following Saturday's failed assassination.

www.newsweek.com

Reagan was immensely likeable, had a very positive message, and had a strong belief in the country. Pretty much the opposite of Trump.

The campaign doesn't really start until after the conventions. The ammo from actual statements and actions with video on trump is going to be hard for voters to ignore when it starts to hit the airwaves hard.

Will that tip the election? I don't know, neither candidate has strong support from anything other than their minority base. Probably will depend on whether the message regarding the serious danger to democracy that Trump and his project 2025 plan-unfettered by needing to curry favor in a 2nd term--scares the h#ll out of enough people.

I honestly think the VP choice might make all the difference in the election. It will be critical IMO. But one of the candidates wanted his last VP knocked off--might be hard to find another that looks like they are independent enough to take over the job if needed!